Rother Valley Railway

If they cannot open a level crossing then the new station could be a good place for a museum. They could display engines like the new mission impossible engine when the film is finished and other engines that can’t run but would be popular for people to go and see. It will be a good area to store replicas that don’t need a line to run on.

 

RVR have planning permission to install the ex-Hither Green turntable at Robertsbridge with a modified engine shed. The idea being that they service Steam Locomotives from main line tours. Provision has been made for viewing the turntable in operation.

I think that as supporters we should try to remain optimistic - it's only a couple of weeks until the start of the Inquiry. It seems to me that RVR's consultants have prepared a good case.

 

You are aware that the MI loco will be destroyed as part of the movie? Not sure there'll be much left to display!

 

And I'm not sure that those behind the RVR particularly want to set it up as an open air store for others' cast offs.

 

If the TWAO is unsuccessful now then I would hope that RVR will just bide its time, continue to build following and support and ultimately try again in a few years. Time is a great healer: just look at what has been achieved since the days of Barbara Castle... All may not be lost and RVR may return stronger: if needs be.

 

If the TWAO is unsuccessful now then I would hope that RVR will just bide its time, continue to build following and support and ultimately try again in a few years. Time is a great healer: just look at what has been achieved since the days of Barbara Castle... If needs be then RVR may well return stronger.

 

In this month's Modern Railways James Abbott mentions RVR and refers to a survey by Mott MacDonald which estimates the delay due to a level crossing at 0.87 seconds (in the evening peak). The delay at Flimwell is 86 seconds.
Pat

 

Interesting figure about the delay at Flimwell particularly when this occurs many times a day. A large number of the objections [if not the majority] mention the level crossing. A supporter has worked out the total maximum delay from the A21 crossing on operating days is 12 minutes. One objector states that this delay 'will kill any hope of continuing to build tourism and economic growth'! I was also amazed to read in an objection that the line would be operated by huge diesel engines - I wonder whether KESR know!

 

I have always been of the opinion that some objectors actually don't know anything about the RVR/ KESR, and the type of trains they run, and when they run them,
the object based on what? scare stories, based on what? If they are against the extension based on what they imagine would be the impact, on the A21, when anyone who knows the road, clearly identifies the bottle necks, and these are not in Robertsbridge, but Flimwell, an level crossing next to an existing roundabout will have hardly any impact, compared to the delays further up the road, As i have said previously, i respect the Hoads objecting, its their land, and they have made use of it, and stand to lose out financially from the loss of that land, the same can't be said of the other land owners who have not, unless they are getting paid to leave the land untouched stand to lose out in financial terms ,

 

People need to be very careful how they phrase things. I'm figuring that this person means 12 minutes in total spread across the entire day, or c.1 minute per closure, because it sounds like the quote has been either misunderstood by the objector, or deliberately taken out of context. Thankfully Mott MacDonald have clarified this, but it seems as though the atmosphere is rather febrile right now.
To any supporters writing in, please take care, because there are others out there just waiting and angling to play "Gotcha!"

 

Having re-read my earlier post I can see how it was ambiguous. Yes the 12 minutes is the total spread across the whole day. There are so many documents for the Inquiry - I can't remember where I read it. The objection I mentioned is one of the original ones.

 

The odd thing is, to experience 12 minutes of delay in the day, someone would have to be there every time the crossing was used! For the average person, it will mean little more than a minute in their day, assuming they arrive as the crossing is closed....

 

I suspect an awful lot of the witnesses, especially the objectors, will fall into the well known "I Believe Trap". They have or will put up statements saying "I believe that..." at which learned counsel will think "Halleluyah Brothers and Sisters! We got ourselves a believer, we are aaaall saved!" Followed shortly and possibly out loud by, "Where are the facts on which this belief is based?" So there is not much use in speculating over these minor details. The RVR appear to have a detailed and well researched case and I wish them luck.

 

Thinking back, about the L&B's public enquiry, I'm just wondering if there will be any mentions of "Disneyfication", or "Grown men playing toy choo-choos" at the PA. I do hope not, if only for the sake of decent adult debate. It would make such a welcome change.

 

Oh I don't know. The RVR as applicants can probably rely on such individuals as useful idiots.

 

Agreed. Can I just point out that the references to the L and B were at a public meeting where their planning application was discussed. An application for their TWAO is to be made shortly. There could be a Public Inquiry as a result of this. At least they are not proposing any level crossings - so their opposition will have to find something else to focus on.

 

Will they be able to put a bridge into it if the men in charge say they can’t have a level crossing. Some railways have been given bridges like great central so it might not be as expensive as buying one

 

Unfortunately not.

The problem is that both the railway and the A21 are on low embankments at very similar heights, crossing low lying land which is easily flooded. There is not enough room to achieve sufficient height for the railway to climb up over the road, and the only way that a bridge might be feasible was if the road were to be rebuilt on a bridge or viaduct, allowing the railway to pass underneath. Furthermore even if that were possible for the A21 there is no way to climb quickly enough from the station to cross above Northbridge Street and then drop back down to go under the A21.

 

If you throw enough money at foundations and embankment approaches, sure, it'd theoretically be possible, but the railway being that visible would be a damned sight more contentious locally. Keep in mind, lower lying land down thataway is pretty boggy, meaning there's a very high water table to design around.

For my money, more likely is getting special dispensation for an LC, pending Highways England getting their finger out and undertaking long overdue improvements to a decidedly inadequate (and none too safe) trunk road. If that happens, any question of a bridge will be HE's problem!

 

As I understand it, ORR have agreed that a level crossing is the only feasible option and negotiations with HE are continuing with agreement on a number of points. Improvements are needed to the A21 but probably not where the proposed level crossing is.

Documents continue to be uploaded to the Inquiry website - I don't envy the Inspector's task in reading through them all. With the Inquiry starting in just over a week - the programme should be published shortly. As I understand it discussion on the A21 crossing will be scheduled later in the programme to enable discussions on the level crossing to continue and hopefully reach agreement.